Should the square stay square

Rfairlie · Post by **Rfairlie** » Sun Nov 09, 2003 12:25 am

The Earl of Merioneth (the Steam loco that is) needs new tanks and it has been suggested that it is rebuilt to resemble a traditional fairlie. Do you think it's a good idea or is it like rebuilding Mallard into a tank engine.

Personally i think making it steam propely first would be a good idea

Tim

rwaceyw · Post by **rwaceyw** » Sun Nov 09, 2003 12:36 am

I'm glad its being rebuilt into a traditional fairlie design, it was a shambles in 1979, and i'm sure they'll sort her steaming out too

David.

sillyevan27 · Post by **sillyevan27** » Sun Nov 09, 2003 4:09 am

i choose no.
it's unique now

If it became traditional...I wouldn't be able to recongize the engine

rwaceyw · Post by **rwaceyw** » Sun Nov 09, 2003 9:42 am

It wouldn't be hard, it'd be the only green Double Fairlie

. Merrdin Emry's is a Palmerston sort of Maroon, while David Lloyd Geroge is more of a Prince sort of Red

. Thats presuming Earl of Merioneth comes out green, which I hope it will

.

David.

Rfairlie · Post by **Rfairlie** » Sun Nov 09, 2003 1:00 pm

There was a rumor going round that Merddin Emrys is going to be green i don't if it's true or not.

I wan't to keep it square it's as much a part of the FR's history as The Prince it symbolises the Back to Blaenau period of the FR. You have to rember that EofM was the first Double Fairlie built for 93 years and was orignally intended to be an update to the orignall design. Most of the modifications diddn't work because Phil Girdlestone made a complete mess of the design and that's why it earned a reputation as a poor engine.

The loco has a boiler certificate till 2006 but the tanks are likely to disintergrate in the within next couple of years. So while Merddin Emrys gets it's new tanks (they got fed up with welding the holes up) two sets of plates will be made so that the EofMs new tanks can be made during the summer and swapped over during the winter maintenece period we should end up with a loco that looks more like than Merddin Emrys than Merddin Emrys because EofM has Merddin Emrys's chimmneys and domes on.

Tim

pitleyfalley · Post by **pitleyfalley** » Sun Nov 09, 2003 1:47 pm

What a wonderfully controversial topic.

Here are my views; I think when EoM came out in 1979, there was a lot of bad press about the engine, and rightly so, the engine was a total mess. It looked appaling, it steamed like a sieve. However since the lining has been added, and the new domes and chimmneys I think the engine now at least looks a lot better, i know people dont like it, and ai can see why, however as has already been said it is symbolic of the 'back to blaenau' period of the lines history.

Because it represents this so clearly, I feel the engine should be left looking as it does, square tanks and all. I think by converting it to a more 'traditional' fairlie all that will be proved is that another engine to the same specs as Merddin Emrys can be made, something already adequatley proved by building DLG in 1992. Instead, I think by keeping it as it is, it will show the Ffes leading the way as it always has done, trying new ideas and working with new designs, which although may not be the best, at least were innovative.

I vote for keep EoM as it is, as an engine which is hindsight was maybe not the best of ideas, although at the time seemed to be the best course of action. If they want another Double Fairlie like Merddin and DLG bring back Livingston Thompson from the NRM.

Pitley

BruceB · Post by **BruceB** » Sun Nov 09, 2003 1:48 pm

I was reading through the FR group (no doubt where this came from thanks to Tim

) and opinions are defiantly mixed.

The Way I look at is however there was no hesitation in the 1960s and 70s to Rebuild Merddin and EoM with Parallel Boilers, a dissention that many (including me) would regard as a mistake. While Merddin was butchered, the then EoM (or Livingston Thompson) was saved from the fate.

In the 1980s there was even less hesitation to rebuild Merddin back into a more traditional form. Indeed for many this was undoing a mistake.

So now, why should there be any hesitation to rebuild EoM? After all the locomotive will need new parts, whatever shape they are, and other technical issues make fitting traditional outline tanks even more of a good idea. They are that the current tanks are actually way over weight and are slowly blending the frames. Smaller, Traditional Outline Tanks would weight less and increasing the lifespan of the locomotive.

Indeed, is no secret that the design of the rebuild of Merddin in 1970 and of EoM in 1979 contain many design flaws. Not only did these rebuilds detract from the locomotives appearance, but they made them less reliable and more prone to problems. Over the years, some of these design flaws have been corrected, the D shape smoke boxes being a classic example.

When DLG was designed, the reason for the return to the traditional outline was not just cosmetic, the design is structurally stronger and the tapered boiler performs dramatically better than the parallel ones, and the whole design is miles better.

In the longer run I hope the rebuilding of EoM and Merddin doesnâ€™t stop here. As far as Iâ€™m concerned the parallel boilers were a huge mistake which over time needs to corrected. Modification to EoM tanks and Cab is a huge step forward and I hope the â€˜Save The Squareâ€™ campaign dies out. However its only 1 more step forward. Merddinâ€™s Boiler has been causing trouble for years and after its next ten years of service (if it completes that length of time which considering the boilerâ€™s reputation is unlikely) I hope that funding will come forward for a long over due new one â€“ to the tapered design. Less hope that one day EoM too will be rid of itâ€™s a Parallel and fitted with a proper fairle boiler. Only then will the mistakes of the past have finally been rectified.

Sorry for the long post, as you can proably guess I feel quite strongly about this one!

Bruce

rwaceyw · Post by **rwaceyw** » Sun Nov 09, 2003 1:52 pm

If they want another Double Fairlie like Merddin and DLG bring back Livingston Thompson from the NRM.

Its not as easy as that, LT is an unmodifed, origianl model of a double fairlie, while DLG and ME are modified. To bring LT back to steam, the original parts would have to be replaced, leaving us without an original Fairlie

. LT is preserved as it is so one of the original's can survive

.

To be hnoset, I've changed my views on the subject now. AS with the rest of the fleet, EoM is a unique design, and shows a time when the line needed new engines for a new line. We have traditional looking Fairlies in ME and DLG, do we really need another?

David

BruceB · Post by **BruceB** » Sun Nov 09, 2003 2:07 pm

rwaceyw wrote: To be hnoset, I've changed my views on the subject now. AS with the rest of the fleet, EoM is a unique design, and shows a time when the line needed new engines for a new line. We have traditional looking Fairlies in ME and DLG, do we really need another?

I can see the point of trying to presever a period of FR history, however I'm sure many in FR circles would prefear to forget the 'Back To Bleanau' Era. The FR was dramatically short of money, had cut many corners and certainlly in my opioion the FR lost track of its perpose - as a heritage railway. Indeed the situation got so bad that the company nearly folded in the Mid 1980s and huge image change was reqiured. The FR needs to conitue the image change and get back to being a heritage railway.

Bruce

jdtech · Post by **jdtech** » Sun Nov 09, 2003 4:43 pm

I am inclined to agree with Yes here. After all the FR is a heritage railway not a modern mainline.

I have to agree with Bruce here.

BruceB · Post by **BruceB** » Sun Nov 09, 2003 5:14 pm

Just to update our discusion with suggestions from the FR E-Group one.

If EoM is to be rebuilt in the traditional form, the perpose of the name 'Earl of Merioneth' is also coming under question. Originally the renaming of Taliesin was no more than a 'publisty stunt' to gain interest in the railway from the Royal Family. The name passed on to the current Earl but its FR connections are rather thin. Suggustions currently circulate that with the superstruction becoming another tradditionally outlined farile, the possiblity exisits to re-incarnate an original FR name.

With Livingstone Thompson, the last of the original Festiniog fairlies, safely stuffed and mounted at the NRM and a replica single fairlie bearing the name Taliesin in operation, has not the time been reached as we approach our fiftieth year as a preserved railway to pay tribute to its engineer and restore to this new and victorian style superstructure the name JAMES SPOONER.

This suggust has proved popular with many on the group and I certainlly like the idea, so how about?

Bruce

rwaceyw · Post by **rwaceyw** » Sun Nov 09, 2003 5:21 pm

I'd be happy that if they are going to convert it into a new engine, give it a new name? I'd love James Spooner to come back

David.

Rfairlie · Post by **Rfairlie** » Sun Nov 09, 2003 5:40 pm

I've not read through all the posts on this subject on the e-group so this name has probably been sugested. How about Robert Fairlie or we could just go through the list of influential FR people James spooner, C.E.Spooner , Samuel Holland or getting a little more recent some of the early preservationists Leonard Heath-Humphrys for example

LT would be good to restore as a coal buring example for use a Galas the major stubling blocks would be nobody would want to fire it and another set of bogies would be required the ones it has at the moment are made from a set of frames off ME that are craked to hell and various bits off James Spooner cut in half and lengthned but any way shes still the most atracttive of the fairlies.

Alot of the people i know on the FR feel very strongly about this subject and i for one want EofM to stay square but i think the decision is out of our hands. How can we consider the centenary stock to be heratige items enougth to rebuild them in the same style and even build a new one but not the Earl.

Tim

davidaward · Post by **davidaward** » Mon Nov 10, 2003 11:00 am

The tanks should definitely be rebuilt on EoM, it looks ugly with the large ones, ulike DLG which looks a lot better. It symolises, as Bruce rightly states, a period of FR history, perhaps best forgotten, and the heritage image is far better. Besides the FR has already shown that no change in a locos appearance is permanent, just take a look at Merdinn Emrys in the late 70s/early 80s. So if it was ever needed to recreate the image of the 70s/80s, it could be easily convereted back.

Oh and Livingston Thompson should return to steam as it is, not with the enlarged outline of the other farlies. Remmeber EoM was built partly so that LT didn't need to be modernised as ME had been, so as to preserve the traditional outline of a Farlie.

Rfairlie · Post by **Rfairlie** » Mon Nov 10, 2003 12:26 pm

As someone just pointed out on the E-group the 1970s is not an FR period that should be forgotten. We built Rhiw Goch loop with very little money, there was the diviation again built with very little money, We converted most locos to oil firing as well as dramatically incresesd our carrige fleet.

I think the 70s was a time to rember